W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2004

[w3photo] Re: w3photo vocabulary

From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:11:14 +0100
To: Masahide Kanzaki <post@kanzaki.com>
Cc: semantic-photolist@unitboy.com
Message-ID: <PM-EH.20040209111114.4BDD5.1.1D@192.168.27.2>


Hi Masahide and all,

yes, sorry, I've been lazy the last week and will add the
missing terms from the image regions vocab prototype [1]
today. Nevertheless we still have this "new namespace" 
issue. (I'm currently experimenting with terms such as 
w3photo:Annotation for w3photo specific annotations 
(i.e. "MUST have author" etc.), there is absolutely 
no need to have them in a general photo vocab. but there
are some new terms we should define somewhere)

Maybe we should first decide if we are going to add the 
additional terms (which aren't really many) to an existing
vocab such as Jim's (if he'd accept that..) or if we are 
going to set up a namespace and build a (partly) new vocab
such as the one by Morten and Jim [1].

And I don't know if "OWL vs. RDFS" is already decided on.
Although I joined this project to push OWL a little ;-),
I'd vote for an "rdfs:Class"-based vocab now. (We could 
still offer an integrating OWL or OWL DL ont)

I agree with Masahide that clearer info would be helpful.
I'm struggling with all the vocabs and their redundancies
as well. here are the onts/namespaces that I'm currently
trying to integrate, it would be nice if we could at least
merge some of those dealing with photos:

[creative commons, RDFS]
   xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" 
[mindswap conference, OWL Lite]
   xmlns:conf="http://www.mindswap.org/~golbeck/web/www04photo.owl#"
[dublin core, RDFS]
   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
[foaf, RDFS+OWL]
   xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
[jim's photo vocab, RDFS]
   xmlns:image="http://jibbering.com/vocabs/image/#"
[image regions, uses owl:subClassOf, but would be OWL Lite otherwise]
 xmlns:imreg="http://www.wasab.dk/morten/2004/01/image-regions-schema.rdf"
[mindswap multimedia, OWL, but uses owl:subPropertyOf, daml:collection]
   xmlns:tec="http://www.mindswap.org/~glapizco/technical.owl#"
[dummy namespace for additional terms]
   xmlns:w3photo="http://www.example.com/specs/w3photo#"
   - boundingBox
   - image regions and coords if we don't use [1]

Afterwards Libby's well-elaborated vocabulary description at the Wiki
could be updated and we'd be done? or are there still more open issues?

benjamin


[1] http://www.wasab.dk/morten/2004/01/image-regions-schema.rdf


On 09.02.2004 15:42:09, Masahide Kanzaki wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Now a few weeks passed after the discussion of the w3photo vocabulary, I
>want to make the current situation of proposed terms a bit clearer.
>
>As per discussion by Morten and Jim, following classes and properties were
>proposed [1]:
>
>At 1:00 AM +0100 04.1.21, Morten Frederiksen wrote:
>>Classes:
>>- Image
>>- Region (subclassed into Polygon, Circle etc.)
>>
>>Properties:
>>- hasRegion (with inverse regionOf)
>>  * domain: Image
>>  * range: Region
>>- regionDepicts (with inverse regionDepiction)
>>  * domain: Region
>>  * range: Resource (Person, perhaps a wordnet concept, anything etc.)
>
>In addition, property 'coords' was discussed in the same massage:
>
>>After the meeting, Jim and I discussed the issue again [8], reaching
>>a compromise for a solution proposal:
>>- One property, coords, for circle, polygon and rectangle, with a domain of
>>  Region and a range of Literal. To keep compatibility with HTML image
>
>
>I find two resources that explain the vocabularies of w3photo: Libby's
>W3PhotoVocab Wiki page [2] and Benjamin's OWL pages [3].
>
>Libby's wiki seems to show examples with existing vocabularies rather than
>proposed one, but includes 'image:regionDepicts', which is not a part of
>Jim's vocab. Benjamin's page has both existing and proposed terms, but not
>contain 'coords' and 'regionDepicts' properties.
>
>All those combined, the current situation of the vocab is a bit confusing
>for me. Shall we just wait for the new namespace (who will define ?), or is
>there still any argument ?
>
>Sorry if I miss some important notes, but I think it'd be happier to have
>clearer information on this.
>
>cheers,
>
>
>[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Jan/0096.html
>[2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/W3PhotoVocabs
>[3] http://www.bnowack.de/w3photo/pages/vocabs
>
>-- 
>KANZAKI, Masahide a.k.a. masaka
>http://kanzaki.com/info/webwho.rdf
>mailto:webmaster(at)kanzaki.com
>#Please use above address for a personal mail
>#instead of post@kanzaki.com, which is for list only.

=================
This is the TEMPORARY discussion list for the W3 Semantic-Photo History
Project. For questions, contact greg@fotonotes.net.

Subscribe Instructions
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: subscribe

Unsubscribe Instructions
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: unsubscribe

Help
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: help
Received on Monday, 9 February 2004 05:12:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:39 GMT